TheGentleGiant

Commentary and Structure: Nobokov's Pale Fire | Main | Murfin and the Real...umm...I Mean Ray

March12,2007
StructuralismandLiterature:APresentationonJonathanCuller
Firstofall,Imustsaythatthisentryisgoingtobeagreatlengthandgreatdetail,soifyoudo notread,itwillbedifficulttofollowmypresentation.Withthatsaid,hereisthepresentation onJonathanCuller's"StructuralismandLiterature." Culler,''StructuralismandLiterature''JerzEL312(LiteraryCriticism) Consideringhowthisspecifictheoryisveryapplicable,notonlytowardreadingliterature, butratherteachingliterature,Ifinditveryrelevanttomyfieldofstudy.Thisessayisvery appropriatetowardthosewhoaretryingtolearncriticismsingeneralbecauseinorderto teach,onemusthaveobtainedtheskillsnecessarytocompletehisorherjobfully. "Ishallassumethatstudyingliteratureandteachingliteratureinvolvethedevelopmentand masterofspecialoperationsandprocedureswhicharerequiredforthereadingofliterature..." (Keesey289). WhileIagreewholeheartedlywiththisstatement,Ifindextremedifficultyinmasteringany operationsthatrequireasmuchdepthandintellectbehindtheconventionsofstructuralism. Thisisa"mixedbag"ofcriticismsassociatedwitheachother,andformany,moreandmore questionsbecomeaskedbecauseofthedifficultybehindastructuralistargument.Jonathan Cullerasksthisquestion,whichreallysetsuphistheoryonintextualcriticism.Heasks: "First,then,whatisstructuralism?"(Keesey289). Cullerfocusesonmixingbothasocialandsemioticstructurebetweenpiecesofliterature.He suggeststwopossiblemethodstounderstandingthelinguisticmethodsbehindstructuralism. Thefirstconcernsusingthelanguageitselfasaladdertoclimbinordertounderstanda meaningbehindatext.Thesecondmethodisconcernedwithgraspingasocialorcultural meaningassociatedwiththelanguageinthepieceofliterature. Nowthatweunderstandthemeaningbehindstructuralism,thenextsteptotakeisactually analyzingthestructurebehindapieceofliterature.Cullerexplainsthatthereneedstobe

conventions(myfavoriteliteraryterm)whichhelpthereaderorcriticgraspacultural meaningbehindthelanguageused.Theimportanceoftheconventionsofpoetryand literatureisbestdescribedinasituationtowhichapersonknowsEnglishvaguely. Iamgoingtotakeitonestepfurtherforonetounderstand.Imaginethatyouaretaking German,andyouunderstandwhatwordsmean,andsomesentencestohelpyouspeaka littlebit,butwhenyoureadtheliterature,howwellcanyoureallyunderstandit?Itisdifficult enoughforustograspourownlanguage,ratherthansomeoneelse's.WhatCulleristryingto sayisthatliteraturehasitsownlanguage,itsownconventionsthatseemtofollowdifferent rulesofengagementforitsreaders. AgreatexampleofthisismanyoftheFrenchAfricanLiteraturethathasbeenwritten. FerdinandOyono'sHouseboyand CamaraLaye'sTheDarkChildareextremelydifficulttounderstandtheculturalstruggle whenyouarespendingyourtimetryingtocomprehendthewords,ratherthanthemeaning. TheworstpartisthatAmericansfocusonwordsratherthanthemeaningallthetime. IreallyenjoyedtheexamplethatCullerusedonpage290,concerningtheemphasisofthe word"Yesterday" YesterdayI Wentintotownandbought Alamp(Keesey290). Becauseofthestructureofthispoem,weseeadifferentemphasis.Ratherthanfocusingon goingintotown,orbuyingaspecificitem,weseethattheimportanceismorefocusedon whentheactionhappenedandwhatspecificallywaspurchased.Themaindetailshave shifted,andCullerpointsthatouteffectivelyinhisargument. Ibelievethatthemainpointoftheentireargumentisstatedonpage291.Cullerwrites: "Structuralismleadsustothinkofthepoemnotasaselfcontainedorganismbutasa sequencewhichhasmeaningonlyinrelationtoaliterarysystem,orrather,tothe'institution' ofliteraturewhichguidesthereader.Thesenseofapoem'scompletenessisafunctionofthe totalityoftheinterpretiveprocess,theresultofthewaywehavebeentaughttoreadpoems" (Keesey291). Structuralismisaprocess;itisamultifacetedgroupofthoughtsassociatedontwomain commongoals:a)todirectemphasisonatrulymeaningfulpartofpoetryorliterature,andb) tocreateaconnectionbetweenaspecifictimeperiodtoeitherthesameorapasttimeperiod

becauseoftheimportanceoftheculturalbackgroundassociatedwiththetwo.Thinkabout theconversationtheclasshadinthefirstweekabouttradition,andhowonegroupbreaks awayfromthetradition.Thereneedstobeatraditionofstructureandculturalideasmixedso thatthenextgroupcaneithergrowoffofthat,ortaketheirownseparatewayawayfromthe firstgroup.Whenhechoosesadifferentsituation,heunderstandsthatthefirstsituationwas alreadypresent,thusreallycreatingthebasisbehindanintertextualcriticism.The intertextualcriticismfocusesonliterarycompetenceandunderstandingbetweentwopieces ofinfluentialtexts. "Andbecauseliterarycompetenceistheresultofaninterpersonalexperienceofreadingand discussion,anyaccountofitwilldoubtlesscovermuchcommonground"(Keesey292). AnotherkeypointtoCuller'sessaywastheideaof"naturalizing"and"vraisemblance."The readerorcriticisactuallytheonethatcreatesarealism(yes,mimetictoanextent)behind tryingtoassociateanideatheymightnotunderstandtoanideathattheyhavegrasped before.Thereaderactuallytriestocompletelyalterthemeaningtosomethingthattheycan understand,becausethatseemstobemoretrueandmorerealisticthananythingelse.One issuewiththisisthatwetendtonaturalizewaytoofast,andwemakeadifferentmeaningoff ofourownthoughts,ratherthansomethingpreviouslyinterpreted. Butwhoistosaythat'swrong?Havingourownmeaningiswhathelpedusunderstand structuralismandliteratureinthefirstplace,soIthinkthatCuller'sargumentisactually flawedinthissense.Idonotbelievethatthereisa"prematurenaturalization"(Keesey293), becauseallmeaningsarebasedoffofwhatone(reader,author,etc...)canmakearelationto. Although,theideathatreaderstendtolookinadifferentdirectiondoeslimitthemto understandingsomethingdifferentinthetextitself. Cullergoesbacktofocusingontraditionandsemioticstogetherandhowdifficultitisto graspalyricalcodebecauseofthecomplexityofthesocialassociationsmadetothethose semioticcodes. "Wequicklylearnthatthereisasetofsemanticoppositions,suchaslifeanddeath,simplicity andcomplexity,harmonyandstrife,realityandappearance..."(Keesey293) Thereweremorerelations,buttheoverallpointisthatthetraditionofunderstanding structurecanpossiblyswaytheperceptionofanindividualbasedoffofanothersemiotic code,orbasicallyanotherpieceofliteraturealreadyreadthathashadsomemeaningtothat individual.Theissueisthatonelooksforananswer,insteadofgraspingcomplexthoughtsas

apossibilitythatbecomesmoreandmoreusefultouse.Basically,thistypeofargumentis morelogicalandactuallymathematical(sayitain'tso!)ratherthanartistic,althoughthereis somebeautifulartistrybehindthepoetryandliterature.Theinterpretationsmadeoffofthe structureismorefocuseonguessingbasedoffofasimilargenreorstructureofliterature, ratherthanjustasimpleappreciation. Cullerfinishesverystronglyinhistheorybysayingthat"Initsresoluteartificiality,literature challengesthelimitswesettotheselfasanagentoforderandallowsustoaccede,painfully orjoyfully,toanexpansionoftheself"(Keesey297). Isn'tthatthepointofLiteraryCriticism?Totakeusawayfromboundariesandtostretch ourselvesintotakingdifficultchancesthatmightnotmakesenseatfirst,butreallyhelpus graspmeaningin,behind,orbetweenmultiplepiecesofliteratureandpoetry.Tryingtograsp themeaningapieceofliteratureisveryeasy;itisfindingaspecificandinfluentialmeaning thatcreatesacomplexityinthesearch.Butitiswhathelpsusbecomemoreenrichedwiththe literature,nomatterwhetheritisthestructure,thehistory,theculture,orthenatureofthe literature.Wegainsomuchfromtryingtoexpandourselves,ratherthancreatingthesame argumentoverandoveragain.Theimportanceformyselfisthis:asateacher,thechallenges ofstretchinganewmeaningorrelationintoatextwillhelpothersgainaknowledgethatthey neverthoughttheycouldevergain.Ifthatisnotenriching,thenIwillnevertrulyknowwhat is.